Fuji Fuji X-T1 First Impressions + Why I Switched from Sony

grillec

Veteran
Jan 16, 2014
Mh, I don't think a comparison of post-processed photos against e.g. another blog site with post-processed photos could make a statement about best color management.
The Fuji possess a good ability for (pale) skin tones (the S3 and S5 pro should be even better here, I've heard, but I haven't compared them until now) and here the Sony are a gamble.
And they say the Ricoh GR possess a not so good white balance, so direct ooc results are not a surprise, but I always shoot in RAW (or bw-jpeg) with all my cameras, so this is not so important for me.
The Fuji have one of the best jpeg engine on the market and if you don't need the maximum of dynamic it is a good option.

I'm glad you have found your camera and wish good light and many photos with it
 

devinjameson

New Member
Jun 20, 2015
Mh, I don't think a comparison of post-processed photos against e.g. another blog site with post-processed photos could make a statement about best color management.
The Fuji possess a good ability for (pale) skin tones (the S3 and S5 pro should be even better here, I've heard, but I haven't compared them until now) and here the Sony are a gamble.
And they say the Ricoh GR possess a not so good white balance, so direct ooc results are not a surprise, but I always shoot in RAW (or bw-jpeg) with all my cameras, so this is not so important for me.
The Fuji have one of the best jpeg engine on the market and if you don't need the maximum of dynamic it is a good option.

I'm glad you have found your camera and wish good light and many photos with it
Yeah I get where you're coming from. I agree it's not entirely scientific! Thanks for the well wishes.

To my eye, something about the nature of Sony files, regardless of post-processing, can be a little harsh. Fuji files tend to be more neutral, which affords more neutral processing. It's not really about color management as much as it is about the way different sensors process information into an image, and the qualities of that resulting image. RAW files can be tweaked in post, but they're not completely blank slates, if that makes sense. Some kind of processing has to happen to transform light to pixels.

And yeah, for some reason or another, I could never get Ricoh GR images to look right. Despite shooting in RAW, adjusting white balance in post, changing HSL settings, etc. Makes me have more appreciation for the color/tone I like I guess.
 

BruPri

Top Veteran
May 11, 2011
Seattle, Washington USA
Bruce J. Pritchard
I've had the A7, RX1 and just about every other Sony offering. I've always ended up trading them back in because of the rendering seemed unnatural to my eyes. I've also had an X100, XPro 1 too as well as my share of Leicas and Canons but none of those have ever come close to what I can currently get from my X-E2 and 56mm. This shot keeps me from any further trades away from Fuji...
 

MB17

Regular
Jan 17, 2014
Rio de Janeiro
Marcos
Not your bad! Just re-published it here for you: www.devinjamesoncreative.com/posts/2015/6/17/fuji-x-t1-first-impressions

Let me know what you think/whether or not you agree!
Thanks for trouble, I did like the reading!

But I guess there is no plain agreeing or not, it is all so subjective. First there is perception of the photos one is taking (each eye sees differently), then there is taste, then there is how one expresses it in words.

I say that, because I agree when you say Sony pics look more technical, but then you say they are more poppy, intense. I have the RX1r and I use my JPG in "Vivid" then take out contrast and saturation a bit, thus increasing "poppyness" from the RAW original. And I do that because I tend to think Sony is more "clinical", more neutral to me, trying to get an exact reproduction of what is in front of the lens, digitally, thus a little more neutral than say... Fuji... (smiles). Whereas the Fuji (from what I see around, never shot one) tend to look less neutral, because they sometimes look more film like (and, first, it is not film after all, and second there were so many types of negatives around with different textures, tones and colors), which for me alters more what is being captured, but which is the reason you find the Fuji more neutral. But, maybe I'm reacting to Fuji's JPG with film filters applied.

As I said, very subjective. And maybe that the RX1r delivers differently from the A7x (7s in your case). That said, I seem to agree in general with your conclusion despite the wording, and our possible differences in what is "neutral". Also agree that RAW is an altered register of reality, which helps give each manufacturer its own character.

I thank you again. I'm researching a little bit to get a system for a little longer lenses than what I have, and am still trying to figure out what the Oly EM-5ii, the Fuji, and the Sony A7x can each bring to the things that matter most to me.

PS: BTW, the lady's portrait with the A7s is quite gorgeous.
PPS: And to be clear, these are just impressions of mine, I don't really try to analize too much technically, just have fun and some good photos, so maybe all can be nonsense from my part.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom